|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Sept 3, 2016 8:35:00 GMT
...but to achieve (much of) that you don't need HS2; all you need is to run through trains at the current intermediate speeds on UK rails, and you could easily improve things. Insufficient traffic capacity on the WCML. Its full. |
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Sept 3, 2016 8:48:03 GMT
...that maybe so; I touched on it, but I suspect that things might have changed. In any case, the original argument was that we needed HS2, to which this point is largely irrelevant. capacity on the WCML. Its full. ...but that, of course, depends on what you choose to use the available paths for......... One of the reasons put forward for the initial failure was the difficulty, post-privatisation, in freeing up and coordinating capacity already utilised by differing TOCs with their own vested interest in not doing so; an issue that would have been easier to resolve pre-privatisation. |
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Sept 3, 2016 8:58:47 GMT
You split my statement "There is insufficient traffic capacity on the WCML" into two different meanings.
There was no capacity before privatasation, there is none now. Nothing has changed since the days of BR except traffic numbers (UP) and the need to timetable slightly faster trains (the much vaunted Virgin Pendolino is still only limited to 125mph)
The WCML is not a main line, and never has been even in the days of the LMS and the LMS / LNER speed wars. . Its just a series of twisty routes cobbled together up the hilly side of the country. The ECML is a much more suitable HS train line, moslty flat, mostly straight, mostly through open countryside, easily linked to HS1 it should be upgraded, problem is it doesn't go to anywhere that anyone wants to go, except Edinburgh probably.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Sept 3, 2016 9:06:26 GMT
meant to add, all this just indicates how ruddy useless the UK is at planning developing and running an integrated transport policy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Sept 3, 2016 9:20:30 GMT
I'm not that surprised that rail travel is so disproportionately expensive. I have a brother in law who "works" for Network Rail. He has a black belt third dan in lead swinging. Got away with it for decades. Off "sick" at least three months every year ( always in the summer funnily enough ) and then claims back the holidays he's "missed" by being off sick. Claims travelling expenses every day for the use of his own car when in fact he's using his free rail pass. Has a regular kip in a motorway service area when out in the works van and pretends to have been caught in traffic. He leads a team who work on the tracks ( p-way ) and if they don't fancy working he just submits a report saying the weather was unsuitable or visibility was compromised and they have another kip in the van.
I get really cross with him about stuff like that but he just shrugs and claims "everyone does it and no one checks".
|
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Sept 3, 2016 10:51:29 GMT
You split my statement "There is insufficient traffic capacity on the WCML" into two different meanings. There was no capacity before privatasation, there is none now. Nothing has changed since the days of BR except traffic numbers (UP) and the need to timetable slightly faster trains (the much vaunted Virgin Pendolino is still only limited to 125mph) The WCML is not a main line, and never has been even in the days of the LMS and the LMS / LNER speed wars. . Its just a series of twisty routes cobbled together up the hilly side of the country. The ECML is a much more suitable HS train line, moslty flat, mostly straight, mostly through open countryside, easily linked to HS1 it should be upgraded, problem is it doesn't go to anywhere that anyone wants to go, except Edinburgh probably. ...apologies; the extra space and a quick read led me to interpret it as "shorthand". The Glasgow "Regional Eurostars" were, I believe, intended to use the ECML via Edinburgh (and with, as already mentioned, travel duration issues) so pathing would have been required on the WMCL for only one or two trains in each direction per day, and, given the required business timings for arrival/departure sur le Continent, possibly outside the main congestion in both directions. (The service envisaged was not regular throughout the day, and thus only a small number of the sets were ordered). IMO. the main issue was interconnection/through running around London and the inability to bite the bullet to resolve it - Stratford isn't/wasn't really an attractive option. (though HS1/St Pancras has now given further options for resolution at a fraction of the cost of HS2). HS2 (in addition to its other faults) suffers from similar issues of not putting the stations where ideally they would be. |
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Sept 3, 2016 13:34:04 GMT
With the risk of delays via Calais I think I'd rather go via Hull and have a fresh start in the morning. In fact from where I am I'd prefer that anyway. But costs might be a factor with a motorhome. ...even when you're taking your accommodation with you, there is a certain advantage to letting someone else do the long distance for you. In the end, though, cost is a factor. The premium for the motorhome on this crossing is not an issue (maybe £20 return - it is simply quite an expensive crossing, full stop) and there is saved mileage and some avoided overnight accommodation to be set against the overall cost. One real advantage is in the timings - we can leave home mid-afternoon, get straight on the ship when we get to Hull (as the boats lay-over at both ends during the day, loading is normally pretty quick whatever time you arrive) and be off at the other end at breakfast-time rested and ready for a good long drive South and the more attractive areas to start to dally. It's just that the saved time and mileage add up somewhat more if you're going North from the Hull - Rotterdam crossing, making that more of a no-brainer. When the Harwich - Esbjerg ferry was still running, we used it on our "jolly" to Finland, and the cost was very similar to short-sea and driving, but it added four usable days to the holiday. It is a real pity none of the Scandinavian ferries now run (Newcastle to Bergen was a favourite). |
|
Rob
Full Member
Posts: 2,779 
|
Post by Rob on Sept 4, 2016 14:31:48 GMT
I remember seeing one of the Eurostar trains in Manchester (long time ago). The plan was to run them all the way to Manchester but as we know it didn't happen. I suspect partly infrastructure and partly demand. I'm not sure there'd be sufficient demand for travel from Manchester all the way to Paris and Brussels without a need to change in London.
The only time I have used Eurostar was summer 2001.... big delays due to a land slip. We finally got to Paris but then had a mad dash across town to Bercy to get our overnight to Florence. That was stressful and made worse because everyone including the rail staff kept telling us the Florence train went from somewhere other than Bercy. Ticket said Bercy so we went with what the ticket said.
Big delays back from London last night though with signal outage at Wembley central. We took nearly 5 hours from Euston! Could have been worse - could have had that delay going down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2016 16:13:07 GMT
Whilst Eurostar is a fantastic system, I can't see the advantage of using it from Manchester unless it was non-stop. The total journey time door to door from my house in North Manchester to a hotel in central Paris or Brussels I think would be no more using the plane rather than the train. Clearly the further south one goes and closer to the Channel, the time benefit swings towards the train. I think that for journeys up to 400 miles train is better and for over 400 miles plane is better?
I have used Eurostar (not for a while) and it was very good. I also manage to find reasonable price tickets from Manchester to London on the WCML as I tend to know well in advance when I am going. Rarely drive to London these days even to visit the mother-in-law; we take the train and tube.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2016 8:46:13 GMT
I'm all in favour of HS2. Two people I don't like very much bought houses in south Bucks weeks before it was first announced - the line is going right past both their back doors. Snigger.
Awful of me, but there you go. Fairly dreadful people (one in the public eye who has leeched the public purse of substantial funds) getting a measure of comeuppance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Sept 5, 2016 9:31:11 GMT
I'm all in favour of HS2. Two people I don't like very much bought houses in south Bucks weeks before it was first announced - the line is going right past both their back doors. Snigger. Awful of me, but there you go. Fairly dreadful people (one in the public eye who has leeched the public purse of substantial funds) getting a measure of comeuppance. I guess then you would be delighted if they re-routed Crossrail through Windsor Castle? Just think queenie and the peeps south of the Thames cut to ribbons in a single sabre thrust.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2016 9:35:00 GMT
Well there is a new rail line going in to connect both Windsor stations to each other and to Heathrow. Wouldn't mind being project manager on that one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2016 11:48:56 GMT
www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37273020"One Sudanese asylum seeker inside the camp told the BBC he was saddened by the way local people viewed them, and said all the migrants wanted was to live in peace after escaping from conflict." That sounds like revisionist excuse making to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2016 17:56:14 GMT
Yup. Why go to the UK? Anywhere is better than Sudan so how about a neighbouring country of similar values and peoples. Why go to all the trouble of crossing the Med on a leaky boat?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2016 18:05:08 GMT
Prezackly.
|
|
